BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM : WARANGAL
Present: Sri M. Rama Rao,
President.
And
Sri N.J. Mohan Rao,
Member.
Smt. V.J. Praveena,
Member.
Thursday, the 3rd day of July, 2008.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.53/2007.
Between:
Sri Naresh Adepu, S/p Madhusudhan,
Age: 24 yrs, Occ: Student,
R/o H.No.04-97, Shivunipally village,
St.Ghanpur Mandal,
Warangal District.
… Complainant.
AND
The Kakatiya University,
Rep. by its Controller of Examination
Vidyaranya Puri,
Hanamkonda,
Warangal – 506 009.
… Opposite party.
Counsel for the Complainant :Sri. K. Rajeshwar, Advocate.
Counsel for the Opposite Party : Sri G. Vidya Sagar Reddy, Advocate.
This complaint coming for final hearing before this Forum, the Forum
pronounced the following Order.
ORDER
Sri D. Chiranjeevi Babu, President.
This is a complaint filed by the complainant Naresh against the Opposite party under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for a direction to conduct recounting of the said subject paper or issue pass certificate with distinction by removing the defect in the consolidated marks Memo, to pay Rs.4,80,000/- towards damages and compensation and Rs.2,000/- towards costs.
The brief averments contained in the complaint filed by the complainant are as follows:
The case of the complainant is that the complainant who has studied B.Tech with the Opposite party and attended examination vide Roll No.0301612661 and appeared II year IV semester in the year November, 2003. The opposite party issued memo dated 19-03-2004 showing 16 marks out of 100. Immediately the complainant made an application for recounting and paid requisite fee on 31-03-2004. The complainant also sent Registered letter dated 31-07-2004, but no reply was received. The complainant passed the B.Tech in supplementary examination. The complainant got job opportunities in the campus selections and he lost his opportunities due to compartmental pass without distinction. Non-recounting of the above said paper by the opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practices. Due to the acts of the opposite party, the complainant lost job opportunities and bride chances of his life. The complainant got issued legal notice on 6-1-2007 to the opposite party and also to KITS College, for which the KITS college has sent denial reply dated 2-2-07. Then he filed the complaint before this forum directing the opposite party to recount the subject paper or to issue pass certificate in the consolidated marks memo and to pay Rs.4,80,000/- towards damages, compensation and costs.
The contention of the opposite party is that he denied the contention of the complaint and they stated that the complainant has appeared II year IV Semester examination in the year November, 2003 with Hall Ticket No.030161221 of B.Tech., (EEE) and has secured 16 marks out of 100 and
therefore the memorandum of marks was rightly issued as failed in Basic Electrical Engineering subject. And further he applied for recounting of answer sheet, as per practice in vogue, the complainant has attached his self-addressed envelope to the application and after receiving the application, the answer script of the complainant was duly recounted, but there was no change in the result as such the original memorandum of marks along with the covering letter in the self addressed envelope submitted by the complainant was sent to the complainant as per usual practice in vogue. Thereafter the complainant did not make any complaint in this regard before the opposite party till completion of B.Tech., course.
Now the point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to conduct recounting of the said subject paper or issue pass certificate with distinction by removing the defect in the consolidated marks Memo, to pay Rs.4,80,000/- towards damages and compensation for the defective and deficiency in service by adopting unfair and restrictive trade practice with gross negligence by the opposite party and Rs.2,000/- towards costs.
Further as per Clause 14 of the Academic Regulation for four year B.Tech degree programs of Kakatiya University, Warangal, I division with distinction will be awarded to those candidate only who secured 70% or more marks in aggregate in Single attempt in every examination of the course. Since the complainant did not pass Basic Electrical Engineering paper in single attempt, he was awarded only with I division as per Sub-clause 2 of Clause 14 of Academic Regulations for four year B.Tech., Degree Programme of Kakatiya University, Warangal.
Since the complainant has not passed in time and at a time the Univeristy has not awarded the complainant I class distinction marks and he is only Compartmental candidate.
After arguments of both side counsels our reasons are like this:
The complainant is not entitled to get any relief from this Forum because first of all he is a failed candidate in first time, later also as per counter allegations after received letter from complainant by the opposite party they recounted and the complainant could not get any more marks as awarded previously i.e, 16 marks in the Electrical Engineering. So the complainant is not at all entitled and further as per Ex.B-1 it is a receipt received by the complainant. It shows that the complainant has received marks list and Ex.B-2 is reply notice by the Kakatitya University. As per Ex.A-1 it is clear that the complainant has failed in Basic Electrical Engineering i.e, he obtained only 16marks so he was failed. When he himself was failed in that subject how he was entitled to get a Distinction certificate from Kakatiya university, Warangal. And further as per Written Version allegations as well as Ex.B-1 it is clear that the complainant has received his marks list. After that also he ought to have filed a complaint or anything before the authorities to show about his grievance i.e, he has passed in electrical engineering , but the complainant has not done so and he has not filed any paper or any complaint before the authorities to show that he has not accepted about his fail in that subject i.e, Basic Electrical engineering, i.e, it is correct as per Ex.A-1. The complainant awarded 16 marks only in Basic Electrical Engineering subject after recounting by the opposite parties. It is clear that the complainant did not get more marks i.e, pass marks in Basic Electrical Engineering subject. So at this juncture, the opposite party has sent the original marks of the complainant as it is i.e, by way of saying that the complainant was failed in Basic Electrical Engineering subject. Since the complainant failed in Basic Electrical engineering, how he is entitled to get the distinction of marks. Later on he has applied for compartmental then he passed the same subject, certainly he is only a compartmental pass, but not at a time pass. As per Ex.B-3 in Page NO.5 Division is awarded as follows:
Single attempt in every exam.
Securing 70% or more in aggregate … I class with Distinction
Securing 60% or more in aggregate … I class
Securing less than 60% and more than 40% in aggregate .. 2nd class.
In this case the complainant passed Compartmental basis but not at a time. When the complainant passed in compartmental, he is not entitled to get 70% marks I class with distinction.
As per Ex.A-1 and also as per the contention of the opposite party it is clear that he failed on one of the subject i.e, Basic Electric Engineering and awarded 16 marks, later the opposite party recounted, but the complainant has not got more marks so that is the reason only the opposite party sent the original marks to the complainant i.e, Ex.B-1. It is clear after receiving the marks by the complainant he has kept quite, it shows that he was not informed the marks awarded by the authorities. When he himself failed in Electrical Engineering and again he passed in Compartment basis and he is not entitled I class with distinction marks from the Opposite party. Whatever the opposite party awarded the marks and given the certificate to the complainant it is in a correct manner and there is no any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party. When there is no any deficiency or there is no restrictive trade practice on the part of opposite party, certainly the opposite party is not liable to give any certificate to the complainant and it is not liable to pay any single pie to the complainant.
For the foregoing reasons given by us we come to the conclusion that the opposite party is not liable for anything to the complainant. Hence, we answered this point accordingly in favour of opposite party against the complainant.
Point No.2 To what relief:- The first point is decided in favour of opposite party against the complainant, this point also decided in favour of opposite party against the complainant.
In the result this complaint is dismissed, but without costs.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum, today, the 3rd July, 2008).
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
Member Member President,
District Consumer Forum, Warangal.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
On behalf of Complainant On behalf of Opposite Party
Affidavit of complainant filed. Affidavit of Opposite party filed.
EXHIBITS MARKED On behalf of complainant
- Ex.A-1 Memorandum of Marks issued by Opposite party, dt.19-3-04.
- Ex.A-2 Consolidated Memorandum of Marks, dt.25-5-06.
- Ex.A-3 Challan for Rs.20/-.
- Ex.A-4 Postal receipt.
- Ex.A-5 O/c of legal notice issued to Opposite party, dt.6-01-07.
- Ex.A-6 O/c of legal notice issued to KITS, dt.6-01-07.
- Ex.A-7 Postal receipt.
- Ex.A-8 Postal Acknowledgment
- Ex.A-9 Postal Acknowledgment.
- Ex.A-10 Reply notice to counsel for complainant.
On behalf of Opposite party
- Ex.B-1 Receipt, dt.9-2-07.
- Ex.B-2 Letter from Opposite party to counsel for complainant,
dt.7-2-07.
3. Ex.B-3 Academic Regulations issued by Opposite party.
Sd/-
President.
|
